Theory and Practice

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Theory and Practice JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES VOLUME 34, NUMBER 4, 1978 Theory and Practice Dorwin Cartwright University of Michigan When Kurt Lewin proposed that “there is nothing so practical as a good theory,” he intended to encourage the development of the kind of theory that can be used for the solution of social problems. He believed that such a theory would have to meet three requirements: (a) behavior should be conceived as the product of an interdependent field of determinants, (b) explanatory concepts should refer to the situation as it exists for the individual whose behavior is to be explained, and (c) causes of behavior should be viewed as contemporaneous with behavior itself. Lewin’s adherence to these requirements led him progressively to broaden his conception of the life space to encompass an increasing range of determinants that originate in the social, political, economic, and technological environment. It is argued here that the development of social psychology has, on the contrary, become pro- gressively restricted to processes occurring within individuals and that, as a result, social psychological theory is unable to contribute optimally to the improvement of social practice. I consider it a very great priviledge to have been given this opportunity of adding my tribute to the memory of Kurt Lewin, for he was one of the truly great figures in the history of social psychology. We all share a great indebtedness to people like Lewin who contributed so much to the early development of social psychology and who established the intellectual framework of the discipline as it exists today. We should be grateful to SPSSI for providing an annual occasion of this sort on which we can renew our links with the past. It was my good fortune to have worked with Lewin during the better part of the last decade of his life. And this award has a special significance for me personally since it falls on the fortieth anniversary of my first association with him. When I first met Lewin at the University of Iowa in the Correspondence regarding this article may be addressed to D. Cartwright, 643 Island View Drive, Santa Barbara, CA 93109. 168 THEORY AND PRACTICE 169 summer of 1938, he had been in this country just five years and was still actively engaged in the process of adapting to American culture. I quickly discovered, however, that for Lewin this was not simply a matter of learning a new language and new customs but that it also constituted a challenge to him as a psychologist, for he saw life as an interdependent whole which could not be compartmentalized into isolated spheres of science and everyday living. He was impressed by the pervasive differences that he observed between Germany and the United States and had already begun a program of research to illuminate their psychological and social significance. He was distressed by the political and social events that had forced him and so many others to leave Germany and was convinced that the developments in the world at large were leading inevitably to war. But despite his gloomy predictions of the immediate future, which unfortu- nately proved to be remarkably accurate, he remained basically optimistic, since he believed that social psychology, if properly developed, could provide the information and understanding required for the solution of society’s fundamental problems. And he was fully committed to the task of helping social psychology achieve this important objective. In order to understand the nature of Lewin’s thinking about the way in which social psychology can best contribute to the improvement of social practice, it is essential to remember that he was, above all, a theorist and that throughout his career he was primarily concerned with the problem of constructing an empirically based theory of human behavior. But he did not see this commitment to theory as irrelevant to, or in any way incom- patible with, his concern for the solution of social problems. He was convinced that the interests of the theorist and the practitioner are inextricably interrelated, and he was disturbed by the fact that psychologists had come to specialize so completely either in theory or practice that a gulf had developed between those concerned with these two objectives. It was his desire to counteract this separation that motivated his famous assertion that “there is nothing so practical as a good theory.” Over the years, this aphorism has become part of the folklore of social psychology and has often been invoked to provide pragmatic justification for our theoretical activities. But if one is to appreciate the full import of what Lewin had in mind when he made this statement, it is necessary to view it in context, since it was only part of the concluding sentence of a rather complex discussion of the problem of how theory should relate to practice. 170 DORWIN CARTWRIGHT Lewin’s treatment of this problem was premised on the assumption that every field of science must be primarily concerned with theory, since it is theory that illuminates the causal structure of the empirical world. He then observed that, in social psychology, theory does more than advance knowledge, for it also provides the sort of understanding required for the solution of social problems. He then pointed out that if theory is to contribute effectively to the attainment of either of these objectives, it must deal with those variables in society that make a difference. And he proposed that this can best be accomplished by close cooperation between the theorist and the practitioner, since it is through such cooperation that the theorist is kept in close contact with social reality and the practitioner gains a deeper understanding of the nature of the social problems that confront him. And he concluded this discussion with the following observation: [Close cooperation between theoretical and applied psychology] can be accomplished . if the theorist does not look toward applied problems with highbrow aversion or with a fear of social problems, and if the applied psychologist realizes that there is nothing so practical as a good theory. (Lewin, 1951, p. 169) When viewed in context, it is clear that Lewin’s famous statement about the practicality of theory was not intended merely to reassure us as social psychologists that our theoretical efforts have social value. And it was certainly not intended to shift the responsibility for the improvement of social practice from the theorist to the practitioner. Lewin’s essential point was that the theorist and the practitioner share common interests, that they have interdependent tasks, and that it is the special obligation of the theorist to provide the kind of theory that can be used for the solution of social problems. It is therefore somewhat ironical that only his advice to the practitioner should have gained such widespread popularity. Unfortunately, Lewin did not live long enough to develop this line of thinking in much detail, but it is possible from the work he did publish to see in general terms how he intended to proceed. And I would like to draw on this literature, together with my personal association with him during the latter part of his life, to examine the question of what Lewin meant by “good theory” and what he believed is needed to make theory useful. I shall also attempt to indicate some of the implications of his approach for the problems we face today, although I realize, of course, that one can only speculate as to how Lewin might have modified his thinking in the light of subsequent develop- ments. THEORY AND PRACTICE 171 GOODTHEORY: USEFUL THEORY Before Lewin came to the United States, he had been primarily interested in developing a systematic, empirically based theory of individual behavior. His approach to this problem reflects both the influence of the Gestalt movement, which was centered at that time in Berlin, and the work of Ernst Cassirer on the philosophy and history of science. It is perhaps best summarized in his important paper on Aristotelian and Galileian modes of thought in psychology (Lewin, 1935), in which he presented what he considered to be the essential prerequisites for the construction of psychological theory. Lewin believed that behavior should be conceived as the product of two sets of determinants, which he called the person and the psychological environment. And he main- tained that these should be conceived as constituting an in- terdependent whole. It was this assumption that gave rise to his well-known heuristic equation, B = f(P,E), or in other words, that behavior is a function of the person and the environment. When Lewin turned his attention to social psychology, he assumed that this same approach could be employed to account for the social determinants and consequences of individual and collective behavior. And he devoted the remaining years of his life to the task of extending his field theoretical approach in such a way that it would be capable of dealing with the social determinants of social behavior. If one is to gain a proper understanding of Lewin’s approach to the problem of theory construction in social psychology, it is necessary to understand one fundamental metatheoretical as- sumption that guided all of his thinking. The most concise statement of this assumption, which he called the principle of concreteness, can be found in a brief passage in his book, Principles of Topological Psychology, in which Lewin wrote as follows: Only what is concrete can have effects. This proposition may seem obvious. But one often ignores it in explaining an event by development, by adaptation . [or] by an abstract drive, and in treating these principles as concrete causes.
Recommended publications
  • Leadership Theory Leadership Toolbox Podcast Transcript Centennial Student Union & Student Activities Minnesota State University, Mankato
    Finding Your Strength/ Leadership theory Leadership Toolbox Podcast Transcript Centennial Student Union & Student Activities Minnesota State University, Mankato Welcome to the Student Activities’ Online Leadership Toolbox. My name is Greg Wilkins, and I am the Associate Director of Student Activities at Minnesota State Mankato. I am going to be your podcast guide. This podcast is about finding your strength through your leadership style. I will focus this conversation with the work of Kurt Lewin, a psychologist and leadership theorist. In 1939, a group of researchers led by psychologist Kurt Lewin set out to identify different styles of leadership. While further research has identified more specific types of leadership, this early study was very influential and established three major leadership styles. In the study, groups of schoolchildren were assigned to one of three groups with an authoritarian, democratic or laissez‐fair leader. The children were then led in an arts and crafts project. Researchers then observed the behavior of children in response to the different styles of leadership. Authoritarian Leadership (Autocratic) Authoritarian leaders, also known as autocratic leaders provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. There is also a clear division between the leader and the followers. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group. Researchers found that decision‐making was less creative under authoritarian leadership. Lewin also found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian style to a democratic style than vice versa. Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial.
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Trait- Converging Evidence of Cognition and Job Expectation Among Management Students
    ISSN: 2395-1664 (ONLINE) ICTACT JOURNAL ON MANAGEMENT STUDIES, AUGUST 2015, VOLUME: 01, ISSUE: 03 DOI: 10.21917/ijms.2015.0018 PERSONALITY TRAIT- CONVERGING EVIDENCE OF COGNITION AND JOB EXPECTATION AMONG MANAGEMENT STUDENTS Kundhavai Santharam Department of Business Administration, Thiagarajar School of Management, India E-mail: [email protected] Abstract ago, and more than that, there were at least three personality Habitual patterns of behaviour, emotion and thought hold a higher theories formed, and all of them were mental analyses which stake than other factors in shaping individuals to transform as per the divide a person‟s mind into healthy or good mental factors. All expectations of corporate world. A psychophysical system of a student these exist due to the varied personality type which may be is strongly based on the background of school and college education, categorized from viewpoint of various perspectives. especially when the choice of management education is made by them there seems to be a great impact of personality traits over the 1.1 PERSONALITY AND ITS PERSPECTIVES employment that they seek. Hence, this paper used management students from a reputed B-school in Ahmedabad city of Gujarat to Perspectives that relate to personality include the trait, investigate the relationship between personality traits and biological, psychoanalytic, learning, phenomenological and expectations about workplace factors. Since previous research studies cognitive. The underlying assumption of the learning perspective highlight proven insights on personality trait perspective, this study especially is that all behaviour is learned through experiences has kept the same perspective as basis and endeavored in examining and by interaction with the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stream of Desire and Jung's Concept of Psychic Energy
    The stream of desire and Jung’s concept of psychic energy Raya A. Jones Whether energy is God or God is energy concerns me very little, for how, in any case, can I know such things? But to give appropriate psychological explanations — this I must be able to do. (C. G. Jung) 1 It is a remarkable quality of Jung’s legacy that it appeals across diverse disciplines, but I put the above statement upfront as a reminder that as a therapist Jung was concerned first and foremost with explaining the kind of phenomena that clinicians confront in their patients. If a concept of energy or libido does the job, so to speak, that’s more important than whether the concept is metaphysically sound or not. Nevertheless, Jung did attempt to articulate a cogent theory of what precisely psychic energy might be. His theorizing about psychic energy took off in the 1912 monograph, Psychology of the Unconscious which four decades later was lightly revised as Symbols of Transformation.2 Seeking the appropriate psychological explanation for patients’ symptoms, he argued that the Freudian notion of libido as sexual energy is inapplicable to dementia praecox since the illness is associated with the generation of a fantasy world rather than with heightened sexuality. This argument set him on a line of 1 C.G. Jung, Collected Works, ed. Sir H. Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler, and W. McGuire, 20 vols, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953-1983, vol. 8, The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, §678. 2 C.G. Jung, Psychology of the Unconscious, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Turner & Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Theory in Gestalt Theoretical Psycho- Therapy: Kurt Lewin’S Field Theory and His Theory of Systems in Tension Revisited
    GESTALT THEORY, DOI 10.2478/gth-2021-0002 © 2020 (ISSN 2519-5808); Vol. 43, No. 1, 29–46 Original Contributions - Originalbeiträge Bernadette Lindorfer1,2 Personality Theory in Gestalt Theoretical Psycho- therapy: Kurt Lewin’s Field Theory and his Theory of Systems in Tension Revisited 1. Introduction Psychotherapy is an intentional, planned, interactional process, which implies that the therapist has theoretical ideas about the human person and its func- tioning and about the nature and functioning of such an interactional process. Whether explicit or implicit, naïve or scientific, every psychotherapist has some kind of personality theory that guides her/his actions. One can understand a client’s anxiety as a punishment from God, as an innate constitutional trait, a learned reaction, an expression of unresolved instinctual conflicts, or as a result of the client’s psychological situation. Depending on her/his assumptions—whether or not she/he is aware of them—the therapist will experience the situation dif- ferently and will differently interact with her/him. Since psychotherapy schools consider themselves to be scientific, they are asked to make explicit assumptions, and thus also render these debatable and verifiable. By also reflecting on their own implicit, naïve, and prescientific personality conceptions, therapists further improve their ability to recognize and understand the naïve “personality theories” that underlie their clients’ experiences. Scientific personality theories intend to describe, explain, and predict the in- dividual peculiarities in the experiencing and behavior of people. Usually, they include terms and concepts about the personality structure and its dynamics and development. To date, no consensual paradigm exists, but there are many diffe- rent approaches in academic psychology and in the field of psychotherapy.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Principles from Psychology That We Can Use to Inform Web Design
    Designing with Psychology in Mind 5 principles from psychology that we can use to inform web design @bokardo Kurt Lewin “Founder of Social Psychology” B=⨍(PE) Lewin’s Equation B=⨍(PE) Behavior is a function of a Person & their Environment We can’t change the Person B=⨍(PE) But we can change Behavior by designing the Environment Ahem...that’s our job. When we as web designers create screens we are de!ning the universe for our users. We are crafting an environment through which all activity occurs. This is a huge responsibility! If something doesn’t exist in the interface, it doesn’t exist period. In this way we are playing God... The Stanford Prison Experiment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKW_MzREPp4 The Lucifer Effect raises a fundamental question about human nature: How is it possible for ordinary, average, even good people to become perpetrators of evil? In trying to understand unusual, or aberrant behavior, we often err in focusing exclusively on the inner determinants of genes, personality, and character, as we also tend to ignore what may be the critical catalyst for behavior change in the external Situation or in the System that creates and maintains such situations. (aka the Fundamental Attribution Error) Behavior change: Change people from offline shoppers to online buyers Behavior change: Change people from prospective to happy clients Behavior change: Change people from readers to subscribers What do web designers do? observe record in!uence respond to induce guide Web designers change behavior monitor elicit support enable manipulate encourage provoke de"ne Changing behavior is what web designers do.
    [Show full text]
  • Kurt Lewin's Change Model: a Critical Review of the Role of Leadership and Employee Involvement in Organizational Change
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Hussain, Syed Talib et al. Article Kurt Lewin's change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change Journal of Innovation & Knowledge (JIK) Provided in Cooperation with: Elsevier Suggested Citation: Hussain, Syed Talib et al. (2018) : Kurt Lewin's change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge (JIK), ISSN 2444-569X, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Vol. 3, Iss. 3, pp. 123-127, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.07.002 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/190739 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Life and Work of the Psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik (1901
    Review Neurosciences and History 2018; 6(3): 116-124 Life and work of the psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik (1901-1988) M. Marco Department of Neurology. Hospital Parc Taulí, Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain. ABSTRACT Bluma Zeigarnik is one of the most important figures in Soviet psychology. She was initially linked to Kurt Lewin’s Gestalt psychology in Berlin in the 1920s, and described the famous “Zeigarnik effect” with respect to interrupted tasks. After returning to the USSR in 1931, she was in contact with members of the cultural-historical school of psychology and worked in the field of pathopsychology, a discipline at the intersection between psychology and psychiatry, but belonging to the first. During the Second World War, she worked in the neuropsychological rehabilitation of patients with head trauma, and showed interest in lobotomy in the post-war years. A Jew, and stigmatised for having lived in Germany, she suffered Stanilist persecution in both her personal and her scientific life. Rehabilitated after the death of the dictator, she gained international recognition in the final years of her long life, during which she maintained her scientific and academic activity. KEYWORDS Bluma Zeigarnik, psychopathology, “Zeigarnik effect,” Stalinism, Kurt Lewin, Susanna Rubinshtein Introduction This work aims to raise awareness of this figure, both in terms of her personal life and her scientific and In the context of the Russian/Soviet neurosciences, professional activity. the cultural-historical school of psychology occupies a central position, led by Lev Vygotsky and other relevant Material and methods scientific figures including his two “Troika” colleagues I reviewed the international literature on the life and Aleksandr Luria, founder of modern neuropsychology, work of Bluma Zeigarnik, and consulted some relevant and Aleksei Leontiev, with the support of a distinguished works published in Russian, her native language.
    [Show full text]
  • Kurt Lewin's Leadership Studies and His Legacy to Social Psychology: Is There Nothing As Practical As a Good Theory?
    Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 45:4 DOI: 10.1111/jtsb.12074 Kurt Lewin’s Leadership Studies and His Legacy to Social Psychology: Is There Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory? MICHAEL BILLIG ABSTRACT This paper re-examines Kurt Lewin’s classic leadership studies, using them as a concrete example to explore his wider legacy to social psychology. Lewin distin- guished between advanced “Galileian” science, which was based on analysing particular examples, and backward “Aristotelian” science, which used statistical analyses. Close examination of the way Lewin wrote about the leadership studies reveals that he used the sort of binary, value-laden concepts that he criticised as “Aristotelian”. Such concepts, especially those of “democracy” and “autocracy”, affected the way that he analysed the results and the ways that later social scientists have understood, and misunderstood, the studies. It is argued that Lewin’s famous motto—“there is nothing as practical as a good theory”—is too simple to fit the tensions between the leadership studies and his own views of what counts as good theory. Keywords: Kurt Lewin, leadership studies, democracy and autocracy, social psychology, Aristotelian science, good theory Kurt Lewin is often depicted as a mythic figure in the history of social psychology: the textbooks typically describe him as the founding father of experimental social psychology, a genius whose life was tragically cut short. Like many mythic figures, Lewin symbolically seems to unite contradictory elements. His famous motto— “there is nothing as practical as a good theory”—appears to unite theory and practice within the orbit of experimental methodology.
    [Show full text]
  • Kurt Lewin and Experimental Psychology in the Interwar Period
    '55#466'21 @744)1%71%"#5("#0'5!&#14"#5 2!6243&')2523&'#F4D3&')DG !& ( ) E @7#4)'1 921 11 #4)'1B #4 4 5'"#16"#4 70 2)"6E 1'9#45'6 6@7#4)'1C 42$D4D 1E #1"4'() #46@ #4#(1"#4 &')2523&'5!&#1(7)6 6 C 42$D'!&#)#")#B & 76!&6#4C PD 42$D4D 84%#1#11 QD 42$D4D'6!&#))D 5& #46#'"'%60SD'QIPR Forward I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Dr. Jürgen Renn, Director of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, who supported my pre-doctoral research from the early ideation, through all of its ups and downs until the final line of the disputatio at the Humboldt University of Berlin. Beyond that, the Institute enabled my research project by granting me a PhD scholarship and providing a fruitful work environment, while the well-organized MPIWG library offered me the opportunity to assemble the majority of the material for this book. I am obliged to Professor Dr. Mitchell Ash for his commentaries and insights from his vast knowledge in the history of psychology, as well as for being part of my PhD committee de- spite the geographical distance. I would like to also thank Dr. Alexandre Métraux for advising me on questions related to Lewin’s philosophy of science. Moreover, I am highly indebted to Dr. Massimilano Badino for his scholarly advice, but even more so for his friendship and moral support whenever I needed it. In addition to that, he en- couraged and prepared me to present my work in a variety of international conferences.
    [Show full text]
  • A Theoretical Model
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Gail Patricia Robinson for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education presented on June 6, 1977 Title: THE ACQUISITION OF VALUES: A THEORETICAL MODEL Abstract Approved: Redacted for /Privacy p/ Dr. Mary Jane Wall Values pervade every aspect of our lives, yet often our values remain elusive, even hidden from ourselves. Our values emerge, rich in feelings, but often unlabeled, to tell us what to do and how to do it. The conflicts among our various values cause us embarrassment and pain in our decision making. Since values play such an important role in our lives, it is important that we try to understand what our values are, how they are formed, and how they determine our behavior. The main purpose of this thesis is to present a theoretical model of what values are and how they are acquired. This thesis develops a model based on the assumption that since a person is alive, motion must be considered. By placing the primary focus of human personality on motion and relations, new ways of view- ing values will be needed. Herein, values will not be thought of as static objects, but rather dynamic processes. The creation of a Values Acquisition Model is approached from two perspectives. The first perspective considers the point of view of the individual. The second concerns the individual's interaction with society. By definition a Personal Value System cannot come into existence without both aspects. My Values Acquisition Model consists of four parts. These are: The Personal Component and its resulting Personal Construction System; the Interaction Component and its resulting Personal Value System (see figure).
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Group Dynamics Group Dynamics Is a System of Behaviors and Psychological Processes Occurring Within a Social Group (Intragrou
    4. Group dynamics Group dynamics is a system of behaviors and psychological processes occurring within a social group (intragroup dynamics), or between social groups (intergroup dynamics). The study of group dynamics can be useful in understanding decision- making behavior, tracking the spread of diseases in society, creating effective therapy techniques, and following the emergence and popularity of new ideas and technologies. Group dynamics are at the core of understanding racism, sexism, and other forms of social prejudice and discrimination. These applications of the field are studied in psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, epidemiology, education, social work, business, and communication studies. 4.1 History The history of group dynamics (or group processes)] has a consistent, underlying premise: 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.' A social group is an entity, which has qualities that cannot be understood just by studying the individuals that make up the group. In 1924, Gestalt psychologist, Max Wertheimer identified this fact, stating ‘There are entities where the behavior of the whole cannot be derived from its individual elements nor from the way these elements fit together; rather the opposite is true: the properties of any of the parts are determined by the intrinsic structural laws of the whole’ (Wertheimer 1924, p. 7). As a field of study, group dynamics has roots in both psychology and sociology. Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920), credited as the founder of experimental psychology, had a particular interest in the psychology of communities, which he believed possessed phenomena (human language, customs, and religion) that could not be described through a study of the individual.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychologues Américains
    Psychologues américains A G (suite) M (suite) • Robert Abelson • Gustave M. Gilbert • Christina Maslach • Gordon Willard • Carol Gilligan • Abraham Maslow Allport • Stephen Gilligan • David McClelland • Richard Alpert • Daniel Goleman • Phil McGraw • Dan Ariely • Thomas Gordon • Albert Mehrabian • Solomon Asch • Temple Grandin • Stanley Milgram • Blake Ashforth • Clare Graves • Geoffrey Miller • David Ausubel • Joy Paul Guilford (psychologue) • Moubarak Awad • George Armitage H Miller B • Theodore Millon • G. Stanley Hall • James Baldwin • Daria Halprin N (psychologue) • Harry Harlow • Theodore Barber • Alan Hartman • Ulric Neisser • Gregory Bateson • Torey Hayden • Richard Noll • Diana Baumrind • Frederick Herzberg • Alex Bavelas • Ernest Hilgard O • Don Beck • James Hillman • Benjamin Bloom • Allan Hobson • James Olds • Edwin Garrigues • John L. Holland Boring • John Henry Holland P • Loretta Bradley • Evelyn Hooker • Nathaniel Branden • Carl Hovland • Baron Perlman • Urie Bronfenbrenner • Clark Leonard Hull • Walter Pitts • Joyce Brothers • Jerome Bruner J R • David Buss • Howard Buten • William James • Joseph Banks Rhine • Kay Redfield Jamison • Kenneth Ring C • Irving Janis • Judith Rodin • Arthur Janov • Carl Rogers • John Bissell Carroll • Joseph Jastrow • Milton Rokeach • James McKeen Cattell • Julian Jaynes • Eleanor Rosch • Raymond Cattell • Arthur Jensen • Marshall Rosenberg • Cary Cherniss • Frank Rosenblatt • Robert Cialdini K • Robert Rosenthal • Mary Cover Jones • Julian Rotter • Lee Cronbach • Daniel Kahneman • Paul Rozin
    [Show full text]